20 10 250 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Prospects for the New Sugar Crop Description An account of the resource PROSPECTS FOR THE NEW SUGAR CROP.--At a meeting of the Louisiana Agricultural Society, held recently, a paper was read from Judge Post, President of the Society, in which he informs the Society that the future prospects of the sugar interest in Louisiana have undergone an unexpected and highly favorable change. - <xsl-text></xsl-text>Nat. Intell. <xsl-text></xsl-text>"The cane has of late years been subject to a variety of diseases, including a borer worm, an insect often found in the West Indies, but until lately unknown in Louisiana. The severe cold of last winter, while it nearly destroyed the crop on hand, also destroyed that mischievous insect and the other causes of disease, whatever they are. An unusual breadth of land has been planted this year, and, with anything like a fair season, in his opinion, an average crop will surely be made." If the friends of free sugar persist in their agitation, we should not wonder if the sugar planters should quit complaining altogether, and find out that the cane was never healthier, the season better, the extent of planting greater, the prospect brighter. Really, it is time to have done with such trifling. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The National Era Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2.19.1857 https://productsoffreelabor.com/files/original/36011c4083e35c15a3d9a94ddb0c2930.jpg 99b11213b56168c4bdf8c8b2896937dc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Advertisements Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource R.L. Murray (Advertisement) Description An account of the resource FREE LABOR PRODUCE. R. L. MURRAY, 377 Pearl Street, New York. WHOLESALE AND RETAIL. Dealer in Free Labor Groceries and Dry Goods. Particular attention paid to the selection of Teas and Coffees. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The National Era Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5.3.1849 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Advertisements Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Removal: Lydia White (Advertisement) Description An account of the resource REMOVAL LYDIA WHITE has removed from 219 North Second street, to the Northwest corner of Fifth and Cherry streets, where she will continue to keep a general assortment of groceries, the product of free-labor, wholesale and retail. Also, the dry goods manufactured by the American Free Produce Association. Just recived, fifty barrels prime Laguira sugar. Philadelphia, Second month 2d, 1843. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived National Anti-Slavery Standard Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5.11.1843 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Advertisements Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert Lindley Murray (Advertisement) Description An account of the resource FREE LABOR PRODUCE. The subscriber, having purchased the stock of Hoag & Wood, purposes carrying on the business, dealing exclusively in produce which is the result of Free Labor. He has opened with prices which he believes will be found (with the exception of dry goods, some kinds of which must for the present be somewhat higher) to be uniformly the market rates, trusting the increased business which this fact, as it becomes known, may secure, will enable him to maintain this desirable position, notwithstanding the disadvantages which a store of this kind is under, when compared with those which make no distinction between the products of Slave and of Free Labor. Particular attention paid to the selection of Teas and Coffees, as well as other groceries which are not the product of Slave Labor. Dealers and others supplied upon favorable terms, and orders by mail carefully attended to. ROBERT LINDLEY MURRAY. No. 377 Pearl street, New York. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The National Era Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.5.1848 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Meetings and Events Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Salem Anti-Slavery Fair Description An account of the resource The manner in which the Fair is to be conducted in Salem, as advertised below, will commend it to the approbation and patronage of all classes. May the sale of the articles be in proportion to the claims of that cause to which the proceeds are to be applied!—Then not a single article will remain unsold. <sec-title>SALEM ANTI-SLAVERY FAIR.</sec-title> The Salem Female Anti-Slavery Society respectfully give notice that their annual sale will be held at the Masonic Hall in Washington Street, (very near the eastern rail road depot,) to commence on Christmas afternoon, at 2 o'clock, and continue through the succeeding day and evening. The friends of emancipation, generally, are cordially invited to be present. No labor or sacrifice will be spared to render this sale rich, elegant, and in every way worthy of patronage. An extensive variety of useful articles will be offered, embracing almost every small article of gentlemen's, ladies', and children's wear and use. Anti-Slavery books, shells, flowers, and dolls, very splendid, some in fashionable, and others in rich, friendly attire. Rug work. Among the great variety of ornamental articles, will be found many ingenious exhibitions of slavery, in its most unkindly and touching aspects. Anti-Slavery devices and mottos of every description, in velvet embroidery, silk, bead and rug work—some articles very splendid. The refreshment stand will be found to contain every article of common, and many of rich and rare, fruit and confectionary; (free labor.) As the Society proposes to hold this fair annually, until emancipation, diligent care will be taken to secure the favorable notice of the community. The useful articles will be thoroughly made,—indifferent needle-work being suppressed. The lavishness and extravagant usages which have been practised and encouraged in some instances in fairs for benevolent purposes, will be strictly avoided. The articles will never exceed, and in some cases will fall much below the usual cost. Change will be accurately returned. The funds will be promptly appropriated to the Anti-slavery cause. In what specific manner, has not yet been considered. In behalf of the Committee, L.L. DODGE, Secretary. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Liberator Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 12.21.1838 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource L.L. Dodge Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Senator Wilson's Vindication of Free Labor. Description An account of the resource Senator Hammond, of South Carolina, having denounced the laboring men of the North as the mere mudsills of Society, Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, who passed his youth and early manhood at hard and honest toil, said in reply: But the Senator, filled with magnificent visions of Southern power, crowns cotton "king," and tells us that if they should stop supplying cotton for three years, "England would topple headlong, and carry the whole civilized world with her, save the South!" What presumption! The South--which owns lands and slaves, the price fluctuating with the production, use and price of cotton, having no other resource or means of support--would go harmless, while the great commercial centres of the world, with the vast accumulations of capital, the products of ages of accumulation, with varied pursuits and skilled industry, would "topple" to their fall! Sir, I supposed the coffee-planters of Brazil, the tea-growers of the Celestial Empire, and the wheat growers on the shores of the Black Sea, and on the banks of the Don and the Volga, indulge in the same magnificent illusion. I would remind the Senator that the commercial world is not governed by the cotton planters of the South, the coffee planters of Brazil, the tea-growers of China, nor the wheat producers of Eastern Europe. I tell the Senator that England, France, Germany, Western Europe and the Northern States of this Union, are the commercial, manufacturing, business and monetary centres of the world; that their merchants, manufacturers and capitalists grasp the globe; that cotton and sugar, and tea and coffee, and wheat, and the spices of the isles of the Oriental seas. are grown for them. Sir, the cotton-planters of the South are simply their agents, and they perform their task under a necessity quite as great as their own slaves perform theirs under the taskmaster's eye. I would remind the Senator that the free States, in 1850, produced $850,000,000 of manufactures, and that only $52,000,000 of of that vast production--only about one-seventeenth part of it--was made up of cotton. Our manufactures and mechanics arts now must exceed twelve hundred million dollars, and cotton does not make up more than seventy million dollars. Does the Senator think the free States would "topple" down if they should lose one-seventeenth part of their productive industry? The productive industry of Massachusetts, a State that manufactures more than one-third of all the cotton manufactured in the country, was in 1855, $350,000,000, about $280 per head for each person, would perish if she should lose $26,000,000 of that vast production? It is no matter of surprise that gentlemen who live away off on cross-roads, where cotton blooms. should come to believe that cotton rules the world; but a few months' association with the great world would cure that delusion. "You are our factors!" exclaims the Senator. "You bring and carry for us. Suppose we were to discharge you? Suppose we were to take our business out of your hands, we should consign you to anarchy and poverty!" Sir, suppose, when the Senator returns from this chamber to the cotton-fields, his slaves should in their simplicity, say to him "Massa, you only sell de cotton; we plant; we hoes; we picks de cotton! 'Spose we discharge you!" The unsophisticated "mudsills" would be quite as reasonable as is the Senator. The Senator seems to think the cotton planters hold us in the hollow of their hands; if they shake them, we tremble; if they close them, we perish. But the Senator from South Carolina, after crowning cotton as king, with power to bring England and all the civilized world "toppling" down in the yawning gulfs of bankruptcy and ruin, complacently tells the Senate and the trembling subjects of his cotton king that "the greatest strength of the South arises from the harmony of her political institutions;" that "her forms of society are the best in the world;" that "she has an extent of political freedom, combined with entire security, seen nowhere on earth." The South, he tells us, "is satisfied, harmonious, and prosperous," and he asked us if we "have heard that the ghosts of Mendoza and Torquemada are stalking in the streets of our great cities; that the inquisition is at hand, and that there are fearful rumors of consultations for vigilance committees?' Sir, this self-complacency is sublime! No son of the Celestial Empire can approach the Senator in self-complacency. That "society is the best in the world" where more than three millions of beings, created in the image of their God, are held as chattels--sunk from the lofty level of humanity, down to the abject condition of unreasoning beasts of burden! That "society is the best in the world" where are manacles, chains and whips, auction blocks, prisons, bloodhounds, scourgings, lynchings and burnings, laws to torture the body, shrivel the mind and debase the soul; where labor is dishonored and laborers despised! "Political freedom" in a land where woman is imprisoned for teaching little children to read the Holy Scriptures, where professors are deposed and banished for opposing the extension of slavery; where public men are exiled for quoting in a national Convention the words of Jefferson; where voters are mobbed for appearing to vote for free territory; and where booksellers are driven from the country for selling a copy of that master work of genius, "Uncle Tom's Cabin!" And land of "certain security," where patrols, costing, as in Old Virginia, more than is expended to educate her poor children, stalk the country to catch the faintest rumor of discontent; where the bay of the bloodhound never ceases; where but little more than one year ago rose the startling cry of insurrection; and where men, some of them owned by a member of this body, were scourged and murdered for suspected insurrection! "Political freedom" and "certain security" in a land which demands that seventeen millions of freemen shall stand guard to seize and carry back fleeing bondmen! The Senator from South Carolina exclaims, "The man who lives by daily labor, your whole class of manual laborers, are essentially slaves--they feel galled by their degradation." What a sentiment is this to hear uttered in the councils of this democratic Republic! The Senator's political associates, who listen to these words which brand hundreds of thousands of the men they represent in the free States and hundreds of their neighbors and personal friends as slaves, have found no words to repel or rebuke this language. This language of scorn and contempt is addressed to Senators who were not nursed by a slave, whose lot it was to toil with their own hands--to eat bread, not by the sweat of another's brow, but by their own. Sir, I am the son of a "hireling manual laborer," who, with the frosts of seventy winters on his brow, "lives by daily labor." I too have been a daily laborer. I too have been a hireling manual laborer. Poverty cast its dark and chilling shadow over the home of my childhood, and want was there sometimes--an unbidden guest. At the age of ten years--to aid him who gave me being in keeping the gaunt spectre from the hearth of the mother who bore me--I left the home of my boyhood and went to earn my bread by "daily labor." Many a weary mile have I travelled, "To beg a brother of the earth To give me leave to toil." Sir, I have toiled as a "hireling manual laborer" in the field and in the workshop; and I tell the Senator from South Carolina that I never felt "galled by my degradation." No, sir--never! Perhaps the Senator who represents that "other class which leads progress, and civilization, and refinement," will ascribe this to obtuseness of intellect and blunted sensibilities of the heart. Sir, I was conscious of my manhood; I was the peer of my employer; I knew that the laws and institutions of my native and adopted States threw over him and over me alike the panoply of equality; I knew, too, that the world was before me, that its wealth, its garnered treasurees of knowledge, its honors, the coveted prizes of life, were within the grasp of a brave heart, and a tireless hand, and I accepted the responsibilities of my position, all unconscious that I was a "slave." I have employed others, hundreds of "hireling manual laborers." Some of them possessed, and now possess, more property than I ever owned; some of them were better educated and better read, too, than some Senators on this floor; and many of them, in moral excellence and purity of character, I could not but feel, were my superiors. I have occupied, Mr. President, for more than thirty years, the relation of employer, and while I never "felt galled by my degradation" in the one case, in the other I was never conscious that my "hireling laborers" were my inferiors. That man is a "snob" who boasts of being a "hireling laborer;" or who assumes any superiority over others because he is an employer. Honest labor is honorable; and the man who is ashamed that he is or was a "hireling laborer" has not manhood enough to "feel galled by degradation." Having occupied, Mr. President, the relation of either employed or employer for the third of a century; having lived in a Commonwealth where the "hireling class of manual laborers" are the depositories of political power; having associated with this class in all the relations of life; I tell the Senator from South Carolina, and the class he represents, that he libels, grossly libels them, when he declares they are essentially slaves! There can be found nowhere in America a class of men more proudly conscious or tenacious of their rights. Friend or for has ever found them. "A stubborn race, fearing and flattering none." The Senator tells us, Mr. President, that slaves are "well compensated!" South Carolina slaves "well compensated!" Why, sir, the Senator himself, in a speech made at home, for home consumption, entered into an estimate to show that a field hand could be supported for from eighteen to nineteen dollars per annum on the rice and cotton plantations. He states the quantity of corn and bacon and salt necessary to support the "well compensated" slave. And this man, supported by eighteen dollars per annum, with the privilege of being flogged at discretion, and having his wife and children sold from him at the necessity or will of his master, the Senator from South Carolina informs the Senate of the United States is "well compensated!" Sir, there is not a poor house in the free States where there would not be a rebellion in three days if the inmates were compelled to subsist on the quantity and quality of the food the Senator estimates as "ample compensation" for the labor of a slave in South Carolina. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Friends' Review; a Religious, Literary and Miscellaneous Journal 11:35, p. 550 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 5.8.1858 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Produce. Description An account of the resource SLAVE LABOR PRODUCE. ANTI-SLAVERY OFFICE, <xsl-text></xsl-text>Providence, July 7 <xsl-text></xsl-text>, 1836. WM. LLOYD GARRISON: <xsl-text></xsl-text>Respected Friend <xsl-text></xsl-text>,—It is so important that every thing should be done that can be done, consistent with christian principles, for the liberation of the slaves, that it is very painful to witness an unwillingness to renounce, as much as possible, the use of articles of slave produce, and a disposition on the part of any, in the least degree, to discourage others from so laudable a course. Where the path of duty appears so plain, we might suppose that every <xsl-text></xsl-text>christian<xsl-text></xsl-text>, and every <xsl-text></xsl-text>abolitionist<xsl-text></xsl-text>, would be very careful to keep aloof, as much as possible from contamination: even if it subjected him to the <xsl-text></xsl-text>total <xsl-text></xsl-text>relinquishment of certain articles usually deemed important in the family, in short that nothing but the risk of health and of life should induce him to partake. But when we reflect that substitutes can generally be procured, and often of a quality and price as favourable; that Free Produce stores have been established in some of the larger cities, and that others would immediately be established if the patronage would authorise, there is no longer any reasonable excuse. I have been informed this day of a man in Burrillville, in this State, who refused to sign any paper to promote African emancipation, because he was apprehensive it would raise the price of molasses! He acted on the principle that it was better to perpetuate the bondage of two and a half millions of his fellow men, than that he should be subjected to the expense of a few cents extra on the gallon for the molasses he might want to use in his family! How far from this principle do those differ, who, rather than incur any additional expense and trouble for the articles they consume in their families, give all their patronage to those who traffic in the bodies and souls of men? I look upon this as a very important part of that system of means now happily in use for the attainment of your great object. I have been impressed with this sentiment for more than 15 years, and I am ashamed to say, and it should lead me to the deepest repentance, that during this long period, I have but occasionally and partially, lived up to that course which I knew to be right. When in N. York, in May, hearing the remarks made on the resolution to which allusion has been made by Judge Jay and Gerrit Smith, Esq., I resolved that with the Divine assistance, I would endeavor to avoid, as much as possible, the use of those articles, and in so doing up to this time, I can truly say I have had that satisfaction which the world does not afford, that satisfaction which the luxurious do not enjoy. I have copied with some slight variation for your examination, and insertion in the Liberator, if you think proper, the following from a monthly publication, published in Tennessee, in 1820, by Elihu Embree, of the Society of Friends, and which served to enlighten my mind in regard to this subject. With much respect, WM. DROWN. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived The Liberator Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 8.6.1836 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Wm. Drown Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 2. Subject The topic of the resource Criticism of William Lloyd Garrison Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITORS:-- Before proceeding with this number of my series, permit me, with all deference to your veto power, respectfully to request that you will concede to me the right to judge whether what I write be "necessary to correct understanding" of my views. You will thus be saved the trouble of curtailing, mutilating or interpolating for me; I shall have some assurance that what I write will be published as I arrange and prepare it, and your readers will sometimes be favored with both sides of a subject on which they would otherwise have to decide from hearing one only.* GARRISON'S EDITORIAL This subject of slave labor produce, says Garrison, "must be left to the individual conscience." He quotes from Paul, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind," &c. "To him that esteemeth any thing unclean to him it is unclean," &c.-- Can any one tell what peculiar relevancy there can be in such advice to the subject under consideration? How will the same precepts sound when applied to the pro-slavery church member, the Whig, the Democrat or the Slaveholder? Why not leave such to their individual conscience, also? Can any one find a reason satisfactory to his own mind for thus discriminating? Friend Garrison informs us that he is not willing to discuss this question! He is not now willing to assist in leading his friends out of an "error" as he terms it, although he was instrumental in involving them in it.--Many are indebted in part to the arguments he has used for their "conscientious scruples" on this subject. He once laid down, as a settled principle, the following declaration: "I hold this truth to be self-evident, that no transfer, or inheritance, or sale of stolen property, can convert it into just possession or destroy the claim of the original owner; the maxim being universally conceded to be just, that the receiver is as bad as the thief." This was heralded forth to the world through the Liberator, and who at that time would have believed that the editor would have ever abandoned that "self-evident truth," without showing conclusively that the position was false, or that he would deny the privilege to others either to prove or confute the proposition? He appears disposed to permit his friends to stray off into the same "error" from which he believes himself to have been so fortunately redeemed, pursuing after that bubble of a self-evident truth which he has put them on the track of! For such treatment I think we have just cause to complain of our once admired champion. If we have any thing from his pen to eradicate the conviction, that we cannot innocently use the proceeds of unrequited toil, and to upset the above axiom or prove it but a chimera, it must be found in his late editorial--in the declaration that there are "difficulties" in the question--that there are a "thousand others" of vital importance--in the assertion that the Abolitionists are "innocent" but others are "not innocent" in using those products--in a quotation from Paul that "to him that esteemeth anything unclean to him it is unclean," and in the comparison of other systems of oppression with that of slavery!! &c. Is it possible that W.L. Garrison has been convinced by such reasons that the "self-evident truth" that "no transfer, or inheritance, or sale of stolen property can convert it into just possession," and always was, an "error," or that "self-evident truths" are to be abandoned upon such evidence? The disunionist would, as I conceive, have less cause for surprise, and less for complaint, if Garrison would now reverse his course upon that question, and assign similar reasons for such change, and then decline a further investigation. The Free Produce question was a conspicuous item among the measures avowed by the parent society--Disunion was not. "No casuistry" has settled the disunion question "like a moral axiom." Garrison, although he seems to have forgotten it, has thus settled the free produce question. The use of the Union is claimed by a class of the anti-slavery people as a means of abolishing slavery. No such claim I presume will be seriously made upon the use of slave labor goods as a means of removing the evil.--The "difficulties" of withholding all support to the Union are much greater than those of refusing the use of slave labor products, and all the arguments used by Garrison in his editorial would, it appears to me, apply with more force to his case, were he to abandon the disunion ground, and present to his readers a similar defense for his course. After reading and re-reading that editorial, and seeking in vain for any logical argument in it, many of his friends will still be compelled to adhere to an old-fashioned idea, handed down by John Woolman and his contemporaries--thorougly examined and found true by the old school abolitionists of 1790, and re-endorsed by an equally devoted band in 1833, that the slaveholder and the consumer of his commodities, together with all the complex machinery pertaining to the process of their production, transfer, traffic and consumption, constitute one great "slaveholding firm," all acting in harmony--no part of which can be spared without detriment to the rest, and that the consumer is, especially, the main spring which gives to the whole, motion, energy and vitality. If, then, we are bound to be "rigidly consistent," should we not take down the motto, "No union with slaveholders," until we shall have become disenthralled from this vast "slaveholding firm"? The disunionist who cleaves to it holds in one hand the motto "no union with slaveholders," and in the other the tempting bribe to the slaveholder, "Give us your cotton, and your rice, and your sugar, and we will give you our money; but if you liberate your slave you cannot furnish it so cheap--we will then patronize him who wrests those articles from his victim without compensation; we are abolitionists, it is "innocent" for us to buy of him who can sell cheapest without regard to the mode by which he procures his goods." The Fosters, the Pillsburys, the Jacksons, and other non-abstaining abolitionists, says Garrison, says Garrison, need no certificate of their devotion to the cause of the slave. Those may all be good abolitionists, which is not saying they might not be better. Pulpit labor is often mistaken, however, for practical work. Politicians are often set down as true patriots and great champions of human liberty, when there is not perhaps a single act they have performed to merit the character imputed to them, save those of public speaking in behalf of freedom. This they have done with less pecuniary compnsation, and no more hope of acquiring distinction and eminence than has the anti-slavery lecturer. Such may, or they may not be the true friends of human freedom. What we want is practical work as well as preaching. If W.L.G. had been arguing the other side of the question, I doubt not it would have occurred to him to show that C.C. Burleigh, Lucretia Mott, and other free produce anti-slavery laborers possessed all the requisites of the above named with the additional evidence of their fidelity to the cause, that they make sacrifices to procure the unstained productions of free labor. As to those he speaks of as "needing no ceritificate" &c., those of them I have heard, would surely be entitled to a clear "certificate" from the slaveholder for their warm advocacy of a doctrine most essential to the existence of his "peculiar institution," which may be properly termed, "COMMERCIAL UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS." B.B. DAVIS. *This insinuation that we would exclude one side of a question while we admitted the other, is entirely destitute of foundation. It has not the least semblance of truth, and we are unable to conceive how it was possible for the writer to think otherwise when he penned it.--EDRS.] Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-slavery Bugle 2:51, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 7.23.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 3. Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITORS:-- The exclusion of a discussion of the merits of this important question from the columns of the Liberator, seems to me to call for a more extended review of Garrison's editorial, which will therefore also constitute the principal part of this Essay. He considers it "singular" that this zeal for abstinence is almost exclusively confined to a particular locality, and to members of the Society of Friends. With respect to the extent of this "locality" I am inclined to believe he is entirely misinformed. His editorial proceeds, "for the consciences of some of these we entertain very little respect. They are those who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel." This character he ascribes to them for being scrupulous about slave labor produce while they vote under the U.S. Constitution, for Whigs and Democrats, &c. He terms them "of the race of Pharisees and hypocrites" &c., "thanking God that they are not like these Anti-Slavery publicans and sinners." Do not non-abstaining discunionists claim as much purity for their alleged exemption from all support of slavery, and manifest toward the free-labor voter equally as much of this self-righteous spirit? Free labor men do not, so far as I am acquainted with them, lay claim to be entirely clear of the use of slave labor produce, and instead of being liable to this charge of self-righteousness, are violently denounced for self-condemnation.--While Garrison accuses them of self-righteousness, Pillsbury and Foster censure them for possessing quite an opposite character. The doctrine of self-righteousness belongs to that school of abolitionists which would make the world believe they are living in this government without contributing an item to its support; that by some mysterious sanctification of the money they pay, voluntarily, in a score of ways, into the U.S. treasury, absolves them from any implication in the sin of upholding it! and that by an equally mysterious process, the hire which the slaveholder receives from their hands for carrying on his business affords no incentive to the act! that it partakes of an entirely different character from that paid him by the anti-abolitionist, so that they neither support slavery nor the Government, though they afford to each that sustenance, without which neither could exist!! But Garrison complains of the "unkind" expressions and "criminations" in certain free labor essays, &c. Are they more so than these criminations of Free labor Friends? There must be more acrimony among the free labor friends than I was aware of, if they have outstripped in severity his own animadversions upon what he considers pro-slavery conduct among others, and he is the last man from whom I expected to hear such a complaint. But what was the practice of the leading anti-slavery men of 1838--Did they not support this same pro-slavery Government?--Some of them also "strained at gnats," (were free labor men) but they nearly all "swallowed camels," (voted.) Where they hypocrites? That which constitutes hypocrisy now must have been hypocrisy then. Were those pioneers (W.L. Garrison and others,) "hypocrites," who at the same time advocated voting under the United States constitution, and abstinence from slave labor produce? The course of conduct Garrison prescribes as proper to pursue toward the free labor abolitionist, contrasts strangely in several particulars, with that which he deems it proper to take in reference to others who are in "error." Although they are "wasting their time," attempting that which is "preposterous and unjust," &c., he will not try to prevent their labors from making "as many proselytes as possible!" For some cause he speaks entirely different to the political abolitionist. It would sound strange truly, to hear him talking of "not waging any opposition" against the latter! Again he cherishes toward them (these "preposterous" free labor men and women) "the highest personal esteem and honor for their stern fidelity to their convictions of duty." And while he regards their position as a most erroneous on, he will not consent to reason with them, or try to prevent their making proselytes! Altogether, it seems to me an unusual course to pursue toward those in error, for which I can conceive of no good reason. The classing of the products of the labor of the free operative of the North, or of Europe with that of slaves, to aid the cause of non-abstinence, is like the stale argument against the Anti-Slavery movement, still ringing in our ears, that the free operatives have a higher claim on our sympathies than the slaves: For the use of free labor produce creates a demand for laborers, increases wages and relieves the poor; whereas the consumption of slave labor produce increases the task of the bondman, augments the demand for slaves, and extends and increases the power and dominion of the oppresors. The one assists the poor, the other oppresses him. To answer some other objections, such as the contamination of the currency, &c., &c., which have been met and refuted times innumerable by writers on the subject, W.L. Garrison among the rest, would seem too much like preaching to an anti-slavery veteran, grown gray in the cause, the doctrine of inalienable rights, or the competency of the slave to take care of himself. But what more need be said to destroy the whole force of the objections to the free labor cause raised in that editorial, than a sentence from the same article where he admits that "other persons" than good abolitionists, "cannot innocently use" those products? Who can regard this as any thing short of a complete refutation of all his preceding objections! I had before heard S.S. Foster allege that those who used slave labor goods, not being abolitionists, were "thieves and robbers," but I was not prepared to hear such declaration from friend Garrison. It appears to be the fate of all who attempt to defend the principle of buying stolen goods, to get involved in absurdities. For example--Stephen S. foster at the late anniversaries at New York and Boston, says Henry Grew in the A.S. Standard, declared that the use of slave labor products rendered no aid to the slaveholder. Compare this with his declaration at New Garden, that those who use these products (abolitionists excepted) were thieves and robbers! Again at the latter convention, after declaring abstinence to be "just what the slaveholder desired of us," he avowed himself in favor of a free produc resolution and said he would vote for it. If the argument of the friends of this cause are not sufficient to convince such persons, I should suppose their own blunders in attempting to sustain the opposite ground would do it. Garrison concludes that it is "much easier to pursue this course" (be free labor abolitionists, such as many members of the Society of Friends &c. are,) than to engage in these "fanatical agitations." Most of his article however is devoted to the purpose of showing the extreme difficulty and trouble pertaining to this part of the anti-slavery enterprise! But taking it as his opinion that the free labor question is "easy" and involves less sacrifice of ease and popularity than other branches of the subject, I must beg leave to entertain an entirely opposite opinion. I can conceive of no branch of the anti-slavery enterprise more arduous, more self-sacrificing, and more thankless than this. None that affords as little facility for the demagogue who wishes to palm himself upon the public as an abolitionists. It is easier to lecture under pay ,or for a time without pay--easier to withhold a vote, or to leave old parties and friends and vote a third party ticket--easier to print and circulate papers--to petition legislative bodies--to carry the fugitive in coaches by star light--to combat pro-slavery churches or organization--all are easier than to carry out, to the extent that many do, the free labor cause. So it seems to me; so I hear others, speaking from experiences also assert. But is the free labor subject popular?--Nay. Even among abolitionists it is unpopular, (and where else could it be popular?)--The article under review is evidence enough of this. The course of most of the other anti-slavery papers go to confirm it. Introduce a free labor resolution into an anti-slavery convention, or make a speech upon the subject, and you have in the dissastisfied look of the audience, and the frown of the leading spirits and orators of the day, a strong confirmation of the truth. If there be any part of the anti-slavery enterprise that is not "easy;" if there is any branch of it that is not popular, it is this; and let him who doubts, try it. Let him attempt to get up congregations to listen to a lecture upon it; let him meet the sneer of the pro-slavery merchant, when he asks for free labor goods, and see the jealousy of the anti-slavery man who thinks "no union with slaveholders" consists in not voting nor fellowshipping the existing churches, while he riots upon the unpaid toil of the bondman. Let him make a daily sacrifice, not only of popularity and ease, but of money. and then be accused by those professing to avoid "waging any opposition" against him, and "preposterous injustice"--and by leading anti-slavery men with "opposing the slave's cause," "doing what the slaveholder desires," "being no abolitionist and not worthy of the name," and advised to leave the A.S. Society "the sooner the better," &c. [vide S.S. Foster's speech at the Ohio State Convention 1846.] These obstacles from friends and foes will I trust, convince any one acquainted with them that of all branches of the A.S. cause, this measure has the least to do with the science of Anti-Slavery made easy. B.B. DAVIS. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-Slavery Bugle 3:1, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 8.6.1847 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Articles, Letters to the Editors, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slave Labor Products---No. 4 Description An account of the resource FRIENDS EDITIORS:-- For reasons already briefly stated, a considerable portion of my previous numbers have been directed to a review of an editorial in the Liberator, not, as you suppose, to the "annihilation" of the editor, unless his existence depends upon the triumph of his anti-free labor views, in which case it would perhaps be fortunate for the cause of humanity, that your idea should prove correct. I think I do not underrate the many good properties of friend Garrison, and as to any feelings of ill will or malignity, I entertain none whatever towards him or any other man; but those who can see nothing but perfect consistency in all his ways, and conceive their pens best employed in lauding his excellencies, may do it; I consider it doing him and the cause of truth greater kindness, to endeavor to correct his errors. In doing this, my remarks have necessarily gone to "the establishment of abstinence views." I should be understood, that to refute the objections to a question is no unusual, nor is it an unreasonable, method of establishing its truth; and the continuance of the review of the said editorial, up to the near approach of Garrison's visit to Ohio, as the reader will have perceived, was not a matter of choice with me. I would much prefer the reader would draw his conclusion of the purport and character of my articles on this subject, and also on the collateral question at issue between us, from my communications themselves, than to take your extraordinary version of them as contained in your last. What has already been written is sufficient to a correct undrstanding of the latter, if our very "unfortunate use of language" and of ideas do not mislead the reader. The importance of giving especial attention to such arguments, even as those of S.S. Foster, or his "reckless assertions," as Henry Grew calls them, will appear obvious when we read in the editorial columns of the Anti-Slavery Bugle of Wendell Phillips at the late anniversary at New York, "fully endorsing the anti-free produce sentiments which have made the former [Foster] so odious in the estimation of some of the friends of the slave." And what are the sentiments which have rendered Foster or his doctrines "so odious," and which are thus "fully endorsed"?--They are the declarations that the anti-slavery laborer "has the consent of the slave" to purchase of the master the fruits of his robberies upon the former!--that those who are not abolitionists, but purchase thereof are "thieves and robbers"!--but that such purchasers "do not aid the slaveholder"!--that those who advocate the free labor question are "not abolitionists," and should "leave the Society, the sooner the better," and some others equally "odious"!! Notwithstanding the Declaration of Sentiment, the acknowledged exponent of the principles of the A.S. Society, clearly and expressly recognizes the Free Labor question as a legitimate measure, yet it seems to be the opinion of some, that the uttering of such sentiments as the above, by leading abolitionists, and their sanction and endorsement, in whole or in part, by Anti-Slavery papers, as real orthodox abolitionism, afford no justification for public criticism, but that those who still adhere to the A.S. Declaration of Sentiments and to the discarded axiom once laid down by W.L. Garrison, that "no transfer of stolen property can confer just possession," &c., may be denied a hearing through smoe of the A.S. papers and spurned from the Anti-Slavery platform, as I have already shown to have been the case. None of these things, however, will deter those who, under a sense of duty, have, for fifteen to fifty years past, been laboring in this cause against ignorance, interestedness, and sophistry. They need not despair--the grounds occupied by the National A.S. Standard, to give a "preference" to free labor or goods, and otherwise assist the cause--the well known position of the Pennsylvania Freeman, the Non-Slaveholder and the Free Labor Advocate, &c.,--the establishment of a wholesale free labor store in Cincinnati, and the increasing interest manifested upon this subject in all parts of the country, are cheering evidence of its ultimate success. It is confidently believed that if the attention of the Anti-Slavery people generally, was turned to this branch of the enterprise, that, in a very short time, the manufacture of the free, would be made to compete fully with that of slave labor goods, and from that moment the slave system must begin to wane. I believe that many abolitionists are, by their efforts in behalf of the slave, through this means alone, doing their full share towards the abolition of slavery in the United States, and that if each person would do as much, slavery would be starved out, and in a very few years be supplanted by a system of free labor. The free labor system is so clearly consistent, economical, right and just, as soon to commend itself to all candid men, and the feasibility of a project for putting in operation a plan for cultivating and manufacturing all tropical productions, upon the free principle, is such as would require but half the effort now bestowed upon other branches of enterprise, to ensure it success. Upon this disuion measure the Liberty party and all other anti-slavery people--the Friends--the Whig and Democratic abolitionists, &c. could unite. None, that I am aware of, deny the efficacy of this measure. Those Disunionists even, who justify their own use of slave labor goods, deny the rightfulness of others to use them. Why can they not be enlisted also? They say other persons "cannot innocently" use any other than free labor goods. Why then cannot they assist in bringing the free article within the reach of such whom they say are guilty for using the other? It is true they would, by recommending the subject to the attention of others, be preaching one doctrine and practising another, but this they do now, and their inconsistency would not therefore be increased, while they would be aiding a cause which they acknowledge to be just and righteous. To say the anti-abolitionist cannot innocently use slave grown products, is to say he is bound to use the free. It is attaching guilt to non-abstinence, so far as relates to the common people at least, and consequent importance to the subject, as a just and righteous cause. They are bound then, by their own avowed principles, and those of the parent Society, to aid in this work. To a question like this, where pecuniary interest is to be overcome, it seems to me there are objections urged which the object or would never think of applying to other cases to which they would be equally applicable. In a discourse upon general principles of moral and religious duty, delivered by S.S. Foster in Salem a year or two since, among other positions which he laid down, was this; that no appropriation to a righteous purpose, of property obtained through unjust means, could be made without crime. He supposed for an illustration, that a clerk in the employ of John Jacob Astor, should, without the knowledge of the owner or the possibility of his missing the property, embezzle a few thousand dollars--that he should appropriate the whole of it to the relief of the starving poor, thus accomplishing much good without inflicting any perceptible injury upon any. This, Foster said, would be as certainly a crime as any other act of theft, because it was predicated upon a wrong. Now what anti-slavery man or woman will dissent from this principle? Yet S.S. Foster, and W.L. Garrison have distinctly declared, and I believe all anti-free labor abolitionists understake to defend the doctrine, that it is wrong for any person to purchase the products of the unpaid toil of the slave unless they make good use of it! They must be used to clothe and feed good abolitionists, otherwise those who purchase or use them are guilty! That which they declare to be basely wicked, is changed to a laudable virtue, or at least an "innocent" act, byt the mere circumstances of being perpetrated by an abolitionist, instead of by an apologist for slavery! An editorial in the last No. of the Bugle, and the speeches of Phillips, Foster, &c. at the late Anniversary, charge free labor abolitionists with laying down a principle and violating it themselves, which they say anti-free labor abolitionists do not!! If there be more merit in laying down a principle and disregarding it entirely, than in carrying it out to the extent that it and many other principles can be reasonably done, or if it be more meritorious to violate an acknowledged principle and deny it, than to do so to a less extent and confess it, I am not envious of such merit. That anti-free labor abolitionists do recognize in various ways a principle involved in the free labor question--that we are supporting slavery by our commercial connection with the South--that they regard even the reception of money from slaveholders for benevolent purposes, as a violation of the principle involved in this question, is abundantly evident from innumerable documents and speeches official and unofficial put forth by the Society. B.B. Davis Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource B.B. Davis Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Anti-Slavery Bugle 3:4, p. 2 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 9.3.1847